Hydromechanical behaviour of two unsaturated silts: laboratory data and model predictions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results from a campaign of unsaturated and saturated isotropic tests performed on two compacted silts of different coarseness, namely a clayey silt and a sandy silt, inside triaxial cells. Some tests involved an increase or a decrease of mean net stress at constant suction or an increase or a decrease of suction at constant mean net stress. Other tests involved an increase of mean net stress at constant water content with measurement of suction. During all tests, the void ratio and degree of saturation were measured to investigate the mechanical and retention behaviour of the soil. The experimental results were then simulated by the bounding surface hydromechanical model of A.W. Bruno and D. Gallipoli (2019. Computers and Geotechnics, 110: 287–295. doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2019.02.025), which was originally formulated to describe the behaviour of clays and clayey silts. Model parameters were calibrated against unsaturated tests including isotropic loading stages at constant water content with measurement of varying suction. Loading at constant water content is relatively fast and allows the simultaneous exploration of large ranges of mean net stress and suction, thus reducing the need of multiple experiments at distinct suction levels. Predicted data match well the observed behaviour of both soils, including the occurrence of progressive yielding and hysteresis, which extends the validation of this hydromechanical model to coarser soils. Specific features of the unsaturated soil behaviour, such as wetting-induced collapse, are also well reproduced.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".